From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 9 16:35:47 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2201216A4CE for ; Wed, 9 Mar 2005 16:35:47 +0000 (GMT) Received: from wjv.com (fl-65-40-24-38.sta.sprint-hsd.net [65.40.24.38]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D66643D5A for ; Wed, 9 Mar 2005 16:35:46 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bv@bilver.wjv.com) Received: from bilver.wjv.com (localhost.wjv.com [127.0.0.1]) by wjv.com (8.12.11/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j29GZ8LN055464; Wed, 9 Mar 2005 11:35:08 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from bv@bilver.wjv.com) Received: (from bv@localhost) by bilver.wjv.com (8.12.11/8.13.1/Submit) id j29GZ7Zu055463; Wed, 9 Mar 2005 11:35:07 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from bv) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 11:35:07 -0500 From: Bill Vermillion To: Mark Tinguely Message-ID: <20050309163507.GB54538@wjv.com> References: <200503091351.j29Dp4Kw096491@casselton.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200503091351.j29Dp4Kw096491@casselton.net> Organization: W.J.Vermillion / Orlando - Winter Park ReplyTo: bv@wjv.com User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.1 (2004-10-22) on bilver.wjv.com cc: spork@fasttrackmonkey.com cc: daniel@benzedrine.cx cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 4.x and OS-X tcp performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: bv@wjv.com List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2005 16:35:47 -0000 While normally not able to pour water out of a boot with instructions on the heel, on Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 07:51 our dear friend Mark Tinguely uttered this load of codswallop: > Thinking about the trace a little more, the Apple send buffer > must be set much lower (about 18-19KB ballpark) than the FreeBSD > recieve buffer (56 KB). If these settings were simular, the > Apple machine should be providing more data as the FreeBSD gives > the window updates - this would give the FreeBSD side more > chances to give duplicate ACKs to recover quicker. > For related curiousities, would you tell me if the FreeBSD a > Uniprocessor or multiprocessor? I remember having problems with a G4 in our racks. Looking over some old messages I found something that had slipped my mind. A person I know who works for Omneon Video Technologies said they had similar problems and got a patch from Apple to fix this, and the patch was not a normally distributed one. Omneon builds high-speed media servers for broadcast and video. [www.omneon.com] I don't know if I can find this person again to check on this or not, but this problem has been seen before. I never had complete details on this - so it could be in the rumor category. My gut feeling is that it is something Apple is doing not FreeBSD - or we'd have heard a lot more about this. -- Bill Vermillion - bv @ wjv . com